No Slide Title
Download
Report
Transcript No Slide Title
New Approaches to Teacher
Compensation: Research Results
and Policy Applications
Herb Heneman & Tony Milanowski
Consortium for Policy Research in
Education
Wisconsin Center for Education Research
University of Wisconsin-Madison
CPRE Work on Teacher
Compensation Innovations
1991: Odden & Conley, “A New Teacher Compensation System to Promote
Productivity”
1995-97: Exploratory design meetings with National Board for Professional
Teaching Standards, leading edge states & districts, national teacher
organizations
1997: Odden & Kelley, Paying Teachers for What They Know and Can Do (2nd
ed. 2002, Corwin Press)
1996-2005: Research on school-based performance awards & knowledge &
skill-based pay; National Conference.
2007: Odden & Wallace, How to Create World Class Teacher Compensation
(Freeload Press)
www.wcer.wisc.edu/cpre
Waves of Teacher Compensation
Innovation Since 1980
“Merit Pay”
– variable annual pay increases based on principal’s subjective
evaluation of last year’s performance
– Problems with evaluation, funding
– Programs died out except in a few wealthy districts
Career ladders
- Stipends or raises for taking on extra duties
- Access restricted by some sort of selection process
- 22 states at one time
Waves of Teacher Compensation
Innovation Since 1980
School-based performance awards
- Bonuses provided to all teachers (and others) in a school
when that school achieves pre-established performance
goals
- Sometimes $ given to school for improvements
Knowledge & skill-based pay
- Bonus or pay increase for participating in specified
professional development
- Bonus or pay increase for certification by National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards
- Bonus or base pay increase for demonstrating competencies
in the classroom
Next Wave of Teacher Compensation
Innovations?
Incentives for teaching in high-need or hard to
staff schools
Incentives for teaching in shortage areas
Differentiated pay for teacher leaders
Pay increases or bonuses for teachers with high
classroom value-added
School-based Performance Awards
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
School level performance pay plan
District or State establishes school-wide goals for student
achievement (level or growth) and other performance
indicators such as graduation, advanced placement, and
attendance rates
Goals are annual or multi-year and require performance
maintenance or improvement (relative to a base, relative to a
standards, or value added)
There are pre-determined bonus amounts and payout criteria
Bonuses paid to teachers and other staff, or into a school
activity fund
Full bonus (typically $500-$1,500) is paid to teachers and
administrators; smaller (often half) bonus paid to other school
staff
Single salary schedule remains intact
Knowledge & Skill-based Pay
Base pay increase or bonus (typically $300 - $3,000) for
competency demonstration
-
skill blocks – technology, student assessment, curriculum unit design,
etc.
portfolio completion
dual certification
graduate degree in subject taught
Base pay increase or bonus for NBPTS certification ($1,000 $15,000)
Base pay increase or bonus for classroom performance
mastery (typically $1,000 - $3,000), as measured by standardsbased teacher evaluation
May involve changes to single salary schedule
-
fewer steps
fewer or redefined lanes
performance-linked career ladder progression
Combined Plans – Denver ProComp
Additional pay on top of salary index amount ($34,200) for:
Knowledge and skills (up to $4,762)
-
Standards-based teacher evaluation (up to $1,366)
Market incentives (up to $1,025) for hard-to-staff subjects and
schools
Student growth (up to $2,052)
-
professional development units
graduate degree/national certificates and license
tuition reimbursement
student success in meeting two annual learning objectives
state test score growth
distinguished school
Funded in part by a $25 million referendum on the plan, not timelimited and inflation adjusted over time
Single salary schedule is replaced
CPRE Research on School-based
Performance Awards
Sites: Charlotte-Mecklenburg, Kentucky,
Vaughn Charter School, Maryland
Timeframe: 1998-2002
Methods: Interviews, surveys, analysis of
motivation-achievement relationship
Theoretical Framework - Teacher
Motivation and Performance Awards
Expectancy
Teacher Effort
Intensity
Instrumentality
School
Achievement
Goals/Targets
Persistence
Focus
Teacher
Consequences
Positive
Enablers
Competencies
Negative
When do performance incentives
motivate?
Teachers perceive that goal achievement leads to
consequences they value (instrumentality)
– Positive (rewards)
– Avoiding negative consequences (sanctions)
– The value of positive consequences must outweigh the
negatives such as stress, less freedom, and working harder.
They understand and accept the goals
They perceive a strong link between their own efforts and
achieving the goals (expectancy)
– They believe they possess the competencies
– They perceive the presence of performance enable
CPRE Research Findings
Motivating Outcomes
- Goal Attainment (e.g., bonus, public recognition)
- Learning (e.g., seeing student achievement improve,
working cooperatively with other teachers)
- Sanctions (loss of pride, state or district intervention)
Demotivating Outcomes
- more pressure & job stress
- putting in more hours
- less freedom to teach things unrelated to goals
CPRE Research Findings
Expectancy averages
- CMS 62%
- KY 53%
Instrumentality averages
- CMS 73%
- KY 54%
CPRE Research Findings
Low to moderate motivational impact
-
Small bonus amounts
Limited attention to ‘enablers’ & competencies
Uncertainty about effort-goal link
Uncertainty about funding
Schools in which teachers had higher levels of
expectancy were more likely to meet performance goals
(one std. dev. increase in expectancy associated with .2-.3 std.
dev. increase in goal attainment)
CPRE Research Findings
Rewards helped focus performance by defining
goals
Focus, but do not drive performance due to low to
moderate motivational impact
May increase turnover in schools identified as
low-performing
CPRE Research Findings on Knowledge
& Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or base pay increase for demonstrating
competencies in the classroom via performance
evaluation
Knowledge & skills defined by standards-based teacher
performance evaluation systems based largely or in part on
Framework for Teaching
Primary Sites:
- Cincinnati Public Schools
- Vaughn Next Century Learning Center (LA charter school)
- Washoe County (NV) School District
Secondary : Anoka & La Crescent, MN, Coventry, RI, Newport
News, VA
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Evaluation ratings predicted value added student
achievement in reading and math
Teachers accepted the teaching standards used to
evaluate performance, but had mixed reactions on the
fairness and validity of evaluation ratings
Administrators accept the teaching standards, reported
increased workload in implementing new system, & had
difficulties providing sufficient feedback and coaching
Implementation glitches were frustrating to teachers and
administrators
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Impacts on teaching practice were primarily on planning,
classroom management, and attention to state and
district standards
There was a lack of a broader strategy in the districts to
use the pay system to drive teacher and student
performance improvement
There was a lack of alignment of human resource
systems (recruitment, selection, induction, mentoring,
professional development, compensation, performance
management, instructional leadership) to the teaching
standards
Teachers resisted linking the teaching evaluation results
to pay
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or pay increase for certification by National Board
for Professional Teaching Standards
Incentives increased applications for NBPTS certification
Students of National Board Certified Teachers (NBCT’s) had
higher value-added achievement in reading and math than
students of non NBCT’s in two studies; a third study showed
fewer and smaller positive effects
NBCT’s are not used much differently than other teachers by
most states & districts
Rewarding NBPTS certification can be expensive (teacher
preparation time, cost of application, salary increases or
bonuses for certification), raising questions of its costeffectiveness.
Research Findings on Knowledge &
Skill-Based Pay
Bonus or pay increase for participating in specified
professional development
Little research on these plans; District experience suggests:
- Teachers find them acceptable
- They increase participation in targeted professional
development
- Increased participation builds a cadre of teachers with needed
skills
Guidelines for Policy & Practice
Guarantee Stable and Adequate Funding
- One reason for teacher suspicion of new pay plans is tendency
of states and districts to lose interest in bad budget times.
- Funding need not be just external infusions of new dollars.
Resource reallocation, teacher attrition and reduced backloading of the single salary schedule (Odden & Wallace, 2007).
Provide Competitive Total Compensation
Build Strong Measurement Systems
- Reliability
- Fairness
- Timeliness
Guidelines for Policy & Practice
Gauge Likely Teacher Reactions to Performance
Pay Plans
- Acceptable degree of pay differentiation among
teachers
- Motivation to improve performance
- Fairness of procedures and outcomes
- Acceptance of overall plan
Guidelines for Policy & Practice
Engage the Teachers' Association
Include Principals and Administrators
Build Capacity
Develop a Performance Improvement Strategy
and Plan
Align Human Resource Systems to the
Performance Improvement Strategy
Strategic HR Alignment
Student Achievement Goals
Performance Improvement Strategy
(Programs, Plans)
Performance Competencies
(What Teachers & Administrators Need to Know & Be
Able to Do)
Human Resource Programs
Recruitment - Selection - Induction - Mentoring
Prof. Development - Compensation - Performance Management Leaders
Guidelines for Policy & Practice:
Implementing the Innovation
1. Identification of a designated "champion" and formal
leader for the plan;
2. Continual engagement by top management with the
plan;
3. Attention to details and "drill down" of plan
requirements to all systems involved;
4. Constant communication with teachers and principals.
5. Conduct a Pilot of the Performance Pay Plan
Looking Forward
Pay increases or bonuses for teachers whose
individual classrooms show high value-added
Incentives for teaching in high-need or hard to
staff schools
Incentives for teaching in shortage areas
Differentiated pay for teacher leaders
Implications for Rewarding Teachers
for Classroom Value-added
Motivational impacts:
- Bonus sizes need to be valuable enough to balance
-
-
increased job demands
Need to address teacher suspicions of achievement
reward link (instrumentality)
Many teachers don’t believe they can reach a higher
standard of practice (expectancy)
Need to attend to performance enablers
Importance of smooth implementation & teacher
fairness perceptions in maintaining acceptance
Need to address measurement reliability (e.g., small
samples make classroom value-added estimates
unstable)
Implications for Incentives for
Working in High-Need Schools
Motivational impacts:
- Incentives need to be valuable enough to balance perceived
-
negative working conditions
Need to provide enablers that help educators succeed in
challenging schools
Reliable definition of “high need” or “hard to staff”
Need to align HR systems
- Publicize incentives as recruiting tool
- Select high potential teachers
- Professional development tailored to skill needs
Why do we know so little about
teacher pay innovations?
Many didn’t get fully implemented, changed
frequently, or disappeared quickly
No comparison groups, no randomization;
before/after comparisons obscured by other
simultaneous reforms
Policy makers have shown little interest in
evaluation
Will TIF improve the situation?